The last few years have left me increasingly politically homeless. The Republican party has abandoned any pretense of free markets or fiscally responsible economics, while ratcheting up populist demagoguery, conspiracy mongering, racial antagonism, and anti-democratic threats. Meanwhile, Democrats show no sign of recognizing any limit to the size, scope, or cost of government. Their failure to understand basic economics can be stunning. And, their commitment to civil liberties blows with the wind. I cannot identify with either.

For many years I called myself a libertarian. But the more I study public policy, the more I find libertarianism too often dogmatic, too obsessed with theory, and too willing to ignore the real-world consequences that policies can have on people. Moreover, the Libertarian Party has been taken over by a clique of alt-right trolls and cranks.     

I do not fit neatly into any of the rival camps.  For most people, who do not follow policy or politics on an intimate day-to-day basis, this can be confusing and annoying. Therefore, for my readers sake, let me set out what I believe, the basic principles that undergird my political and policy choices.

• All people have the same fundamental rights, chief of which is the right to be free from the restrictions of arbitrary force and coercion. These rights are natural and inherent to our humanity, not given to us by governments. People own their own bodies and the fruits of their labor. These rights, while not absolute (no rights are), put a high burden on governments to justify the use of force and coercion.  In practice this means government should not mandate something simply because it is desirable, nor should it prohibit things because people believe something is wrong or bad for society. Liberty is indivisible, and political freedom and individual liberty cannot long exist without economic freedom. Likewise, economic freedom cannot last in the absence of personal liberty. 
• A vibrant free market is the foundation of prosperity. As a rule, this means taxes should be low and regulations as unobtrusive as possible. Governments should not be in the business of picking winners and losers. It is important to recognize that being pro-market is not necessarily the same as being pro-business. Nor does it mean that there should be no taxes or regulation. But our default should always be in favor of free trade, free exchange, competitive markets, entrepreneurship, innovation, consumer choice, and the freedom to contract.
• The skyrocketing federal debt—which now exceeds the annual economic output of the United States—is an existential threat to the future prosperity, liberty, and happiness of all Americans. There is no way to stem this tide of red ink through increased taxes, especially only taxes on the rich. In fact, you could confiscate every penny from every millionaire and billionaire in America and barely dent the problem. Importantly, there is no way to control our skyrocketing debt without reforming middle-class entitlements such as Medicare and Social Security.
• Immigration is an important driver of American prosperity and achievement. America is exceptional because anyone can become an American. Of course, the immigration process should be orderly, and we should be able to bar those with obvious criminal or terrorist backgrounds. Beyond that, if someone wants to come to this country, let them come. It will make us a richer, more entrepreneurial, and more vibrant country. Unfortunately, we make legal immigration very difficult, which leads to higher levels of illegal immigration and chaos at the border.
• America is uniquely based on the promise of equal opportunity regardless of race or other immutable characteristics. It is a foundation and commitment we should be proud of. However, we have not always lived up to that promise. Native Americans, African Americans, women, Latinos, members of the LBGTQ community, and others have all suffered exclusion, discrimination, and violence. Our historical treatment of African Americans, in particular, has been one of the great evils of our history.  And, while we have made much progress, we have not yet achieved full equality. Systemic racism and discrimination continue to be problems today. Moreover, many continue to suffer from the downstream effects of past, often government-sponsored, mistreatment. Of course, we should strive for policies that are race neutral (and the equivalent for other groups), but at the same time we cannot ignore that the playing field is not level yet.
• The American criminal justice system is badly broken from top to bottom. Far too many things are illegal that shouldn’t be. Police are far too abusive and prone to hair trigger reactions. People of color and the poor are disproportionately accosted, arrested, sentenced t longer terms, and ess likely to be paroled. Prisons are crime schools rather than routes to rehabilitation. Criticism of criminal justice reform is far more often a political cudgel rather than a reflection of crime rates (which are declining in most major cities). We should rethink the goals, tactics, and purposes of policing and the criminal justice system to emphasize restorative justice, rehabilitation, and reintegration.      
• Being poor is not a moral failure. Obviously we shouldn’t strip the poor of agency by ignoring the role their choices and decisions play in their poverty.  But equally, we should recognize the role played by factors outside their control, including race, gender, economic upheaval, and simple bad luck. The goal of welfare programs should be to both provide immediate assistance for basic needs and to enable recipients to escape poverty and become self-sufficient over the long run. However, most welfare programs focus exclusively on the former. In essence they attempt to make poverty less miserable. I am not suggesting that it’s not important to take care of the material needs of poorer Americans. But, in the long run, we need a completely different approach to fighting poverty—one that focuses on opportunity, self-sufficiency, and self-determination—rather than simply throwing more money at the problem.
• While the United States has often been too quick to intervene in foreign conflicts, we remain the indispensable force for freedom in the world. We have an obligation to speak out for human rights and against oppression wherever it occurs. We should, of course, be very careful about direct intervention either militarily or economically. Most such interventions are counterproductive, and the United States cannot and should not be the world’s policeman. Our time, attention, and resources are limited.  But there will be occasions when such intervention is not only reasonable and just, but morally required.  
• We have an obligation to preserve the environment and the glories of nature for future generations. However, neither right-wing denialism nor left-wing catastrophism reflects either the true state of affairs or the best ways to deal with the issue. Nor does dealing with climate change and other environmental issues require centralized economic control, massive government subsidies, or reductions in our standard of living.  Of course sometimes government must play a role, but generally we should rely technology, innovation, and human ingenuity – from nuclear power to planting micro-forests – not command and control to find better ways to coexist with our planet.   
• There are few if any cost-free choices. Public policy almost always involves tradeoffs, seen or unseen. Moreover, no matter how good a particular policy may sound, or how much we might believe that policy to be correct, there is always the possibility that we are wrong.  If the facts and the evidence show something different, there is an obligation to rethink one’s views. Certainly, I have changed my opinion on issues over the years. I expect to do so again in the future.  This same recognition that we can be wrong should also inform policy, meaning centralized and one-size fits all solutions should be resisted. And, when the data changes, policies should change as well.

I would expect there to be something on this list to annoy pretty much everyone.  Yet, I believe my positions are based on facts and evidence applied within a coherent philosophical framework. Your mileage may vary.  And, obviously, I haven’t the time or space to cover every issue here.  Still, as issues come up, I hope this will give you a better idea of where I stand and why.